User talk:Bexor/Armor Project
Archived I put the last page into an archive (2) because it was getting long and confusing! The gallery stuff is finished, art s&f is nearly done, and I've started work on functions which means fresh start. :) - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 03:49, 9 January 2007 (CST) Problems with functions I've only been working on this for a few minutes and already have found a few problems. #On art pages it tells you what functions the art uses. But if you were to buy Ringmail armor in Prophecies it's only available with basic stats. There should be something that splits that "Used by" section into campaign, so I'll work on something for that. #On the main armor page for each profession there is a column for "PVE armor art variants" which I find confusing and innacurate since Insignia's were introduced. Perhaps it should really say PVE armor art that uses only this function (ie when Knight's function is specific to Knight's armor and Ascalon armor). I don't think that this column really helps with anything so it should probably be removed. #It seems like we have too many pages to explain simple things. Going to work on condensing articles (providing they don't get too long). #Armor art and function articles are too similar at the moment. Anyway I will be working on this tonight and over the next few days seeing as I can't finish the art s&f yet. If you have any questions or suggestions (I will be using the stuff discussed in the archives too) please start a new heading and I'll check back regularly. - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 03:56, 9 January 2007 (CST) :Let me try to help: :#I'm not sure what to do with the really basic armor yet. I was hoping we can organise the new insignia/function pages first. My initial idea was to cover that armor on the art pages because it doesn't have a special function. :#Yes, the "PVE armor art variants" column should be renamed when the function overview table is rewritten. You suggest a good idea. :#Which articles? :#Yes, but we're going to fix that! :--''Glynnis'' (talk| ) 18:28, 9 January 2007 (CST) Art box Please look at User:Aratak/Sandbox. That would replace Template:Armor art box main so that Template:Armor art box can make automatic categories. It can now have seperate campaing and material. The only problem is that material often use shorter version like Hide for Tanned Hide Square so using automatic categories maybe not a good idea. To fix that we would need a switch for all the variation and that would be messy. I'm at work now so I shoudn't even be working on that. I will look tonight if the is a way to fix that. Of course we could change all the page to have the real name but with full name everywhere that line will become big and even messier.—'├ Aratak ┤' 12:47, 9 January 2007 (CST) :I think the auto category thing was there because the crafting section used to be for salvage instead. And the category is for things that contain so and so. Maybe, just maybe it's not necessary anymore? :S I don't know if there's any way to control what people put in the box though, because some may put E. Leather or Elonian Leather - there are many variations for crafting materials. We could specify in s&f to put the full name only, but yes, the names are so long and wouldn't it suck on pages with 4 crafting materials? >_< :One other problem that has arisen though, is the different function uses for different campaigns. For example Tyrian armor says function uses include +health (survivor/berserkers/explorers/whatever) so you go to buy it in Prophecies and you cant. :( I don't really know what we can do about it other than making 3 used by boxes and sort by campaign, but that wooudl be CRAP! D: I know it could stay the way it is, but it is very confusing and I'm just not happy with it. :/ - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 12:57, 9 January 2007 (CST) ::As we have done before, we have done an explanation either in the "description" or "acquisition" section that Tyrian armor only is available with basic stats in the Prophecies campaign etc. Isn't that enough? The armor art box will never be perfect anyway. ::What categorizations are you suggesting according to materials? This is only done for salvage items and such at the moment, so I'm interested in how you are thinking to implement it. My opinion so far is that we only need it to categorize Ascended or standard armor, profession armor and armor type (Like Luxon armor or Istani armor). — Stylva (talk)( ) 13:23, 9 January 2007 (CST) :::Don't know why I was thinking of material. I saw Bexor talk about it somewhere. Hmmm. would have to find it again.—'├ Aratak ┤' 13:25, 9 January 2007 (CST) ::::I don't remember but maybe I was. I'm very scatterbrained and forget I said things soon after I say them. I will add into style and formatting about the function thing, I hadn't thought of that, but it is a good solution. Just have to make sure it is implemented! :P - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 13:33, 9 January 2007 (CST) :::::Ok it was in archive. Well its was bexor talking about what would happen if theire was more then one material then Stylva talking about categories that mix me up. Yes the campaign, campaign2 and campaign3 can easily be use to make automatic categories. I'll fix that. One thing though. We need to have the proposal aprouved before taking the icon out of the template.—'├ Aratak ┤' 13:34, 9 January 2007 (CST) ::::::I did try to get some attention at the art box page but no one noticed. :'( I can spam it on some peoples' talk pages? - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 13:37, 9 January 2007 (CST) FUNCTIONS! :D Examples of what I want to implement: *User:Bexor/Armor Project/Function/Survivor armor *User:Bexor/Armor Project/Function/Dreadnought armor If you want to see anything else or discuss let me know. ^_^ - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 14:55, 9 January 2007 (CST) :Great work! They look very nice. I suggest making another example for radiant because most of the headgear uses radiant insignia (inherent). It might affect your formatting. --''Glynnis'' (talk| ) 18:32, 9 January 2007 (CST) ::Okay I will try that one next and see if it causes probs. - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 18:38, 9 January 2007 (CST) :I made an example insignia overview for the prof armor pages. --''Glynnis'' (talk| ) 17:10, 10 January 2007 (CST) ::Looks good, but the name variations are linked to the wrong things. No art pages should be linked to at all. The name should be "Bonelace" (function name, not insignia name). Then have stats. Then insignia, linking to the section on the insignia page, and then variations shouldn't have any links at all in it. - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 17:18, 10 January 2007 (CST) :::Oops, I fixed the links. However, I updated it so the variants link to art pages. The example was how I think it should look. Your suggestion might be better. I would also like to see what Stylva had in mind. --''Glynnis'' (talk| ) 17:32, 10 January 2007 (CST) ::::Variants under no circumstances should link to art pages. That is just confusing for someone who wants to know about stats. I made an example on how I believe it should look. User:Bexor/Armor Project/Function#Necromancer armor function types ::::And I no longer believe calling all functions "insignia" is a good idea. It is too confusing for people that don't deal with insignia at all. They need to be separate entities. - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 18:01, 10 January 2007 (CST) :::::I agree that insignia and armor function isn't really the same. But I dont like the word function at all. Armor stats seems better, but I guess it's some kind of gaming word not accepted :P This table you are discussing, is it meant for Necromancer armor-article or a separate article? That makes quite a difference imo. — Stylva (talk)( ) 21:40, 10 January 2007 (CST) ::::::I don't really like the word function either. I wish there was some sort of in game precedence, but if we use the word insignia, even preceded by something like "inherent" or "permanent" it might be missed. And we have to keep in mind that users from campaigns one and two wont have much contact with insignia anyway, except sold as loot. Stats would be okay, but it sounds off. It doesn't apply to this gaming situation, seeing as all the bonuses are fixed. Bonus doesn't work either. Modifiers gets used for weapons, but it's not an in-game term either. And yes, that table would replace what is currently at the top of the Necromancer armor page. - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 21:58, 10 January 2007 (CST) :::::::Does the word "stats" imply that the things in question are variable? English isn't my primary language, so I'm seriously wondering here :) And bonus sounds better than function, for me. That way we have basic armor stats and armor bonuses added with insignia or by putting more money/materials into the crafting. But it doesn't sound that serious.. Ohwell, this is really hard >< About the table. If it's going to be used in the Necromancer armor page, no linking to art is needed since those links will appear more sorted just a few rows down the page. Especially not like Necromancer's Armor and Initiate's Armor, since you will end up in the same page with those two. The listing with both name and insignia looks odd, since it's just a repeat of the same names. That they link to something else isn't clearly visible. I would rather merge those two columns (Function and Insignia in Bexor's example) into something like Glynnis example, but with links to the "function" pages, not the insignia article. One link to the Insignia article would be enough, it's an easy-viewed table. It would also be nice if we could somehow tell if it's a necromancer specific insignia or not, without cluttering the table.. I've tried to rebuild this table myself, with no luck. It's a really tricky thing to make informative and usable and not utterly big and ugly. — Stylva (talk)( ) 06:49, 11 January 2007 (CST) :::::Darn. At least I tried. :) The main reasons that I still think we should replace "function" with "insignia" are: :::::#PvP armor uses insignias (even for Prophecies only). :::::#Nightfall uses insignias. :::::#Factions uses something close enough to insignias to be understood. :::::#Prophecies armor is confusing no matter what you call it. :::::#We don't have another in-game name. :::::However, I agree that my table is confusing and should not link to art pages. I was bad. I'm sorry. --''Glynnis'' (talk| ) 15:00, 11 January 2007 (CST) ::::::::"Stats" can be a fixed or changing number, as far as I know. I think it means "statistics". What do you think of "Armor Bonus Stats"? Basic armor has "Armor Base Stats". "Armor Bonus Stats" is the additional stats due to inherent insignias and headgear. The *huge* problem we have is to explain how all ranger armor comes with Armor +30 vs. elemental damage as part of the Armor Base Stats but some armor comes with Armor +30 vs. cold damage as part of the Armor Bonus Stats.... ouch. My brain hurts. --''Glynnis'' (talk| ) 15:46, 11 January 2007 (CST) :::::::::I like that, armor basic/e stats and armor bonus stats. And I dont think we need to explain about the Ranger armor, just state that it's part of the base stats, like other professions have more energy regeneration and warriors have +20 vs physical (I think they still have?). I do think people will be able to understand that :) — Stylva (talk)( ) 16:16, 11 January 2007 (CST) ::::::::::Is this 2nd try better? It doesn't link to art pages, I promise. :) --''Glynnis'' (talk| ) 16:45, 11 January 2007 (CST) :::::::::::Yep, I like it. And don't bother so much about the try before, it's ok to have different opinions you know ;) — Stylva (talk)( ) 17:59, 11 January 2007 (CST) Stats comes from gaming days (not on computer) when the mods on an item varied. I don't think the word suits the situation. I still disagree with using the word Insignia, because it is an actual game item. If the article was called "Survivor Insignia" it should be just about the item, not about a function. A function can be an insignia or an inherent insignia. You can't refer to both as insignia without it being confusing. A function isn't a thing, it's a type of thing. And stats describe the properties of that thing. I really think function is the best way to say what insignia and inherent bonuses are, whereas stats are not a thing itself. The actual word function shouldn't be used except when referring to both insignia and inherent bonuses. It's just a shortened way to refer to both of them without needing to say "Armor bonuses or insignia". And stats are the properties of that particular function. As for your new table, I like the change to the Insignia column. Very good idea. I hope I have been clear enough. The English language is my little baby so I get very pedantic about word usage. :P - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 18:14, 11 January 2007 (CST) Crafting box template Crafting box template updated, for those interested. Template here and examples here. I'm trying to get some attention at the style and formatting pages at the moment, to see what people think about this. — Stylva (talk)( ) 08:13, 10 January 2007 (CST) :Looks very nice, but what happens if there's no headgear column? - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 12:58, 10 January 2007 (CST) ::If you set "headgear=yes" the headgear column will show as shown here. If you set "headgear=no", the column will disappear and the total will ba calculated without it, as shown for example here. The "diffheadgear" parameter is used if the headgear requires other materials than the rest of the armor. — Stylva (talk)( ) 14:20, 10 January 2007 (CST) :::Cool. :D - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 14:31, 10 January 2007 (CST) Page name rules Armor function page names: #" armor" #"Attribute armor" #"'s armor" Armor art page names: #" Armor" #" Ascended Armor" #" headgear" Function examples: *Bonelace armor *Dreadnought armor --''no 's'' *Ghost Forge armor --''capital F'' *Minion Master's armor --''capital M'' *Necromancer's armor --''for necro basic armor function'' Art examples: *Necromancer Bonelace Armor *Necromancer Ascended Bonelace Armor *Necromancer Cultist's Armor --''no Ascended'' *Necromancer Vabbian Armor --''no Ascended'' *Warrior Ascalon Armor --''for the Warrior version of Suki's armor'' *Warrior Ascalon Armor (Prophecies) --''for the armor crafted by Seifred'' *Ascalon Armor --''for the overview page of Suki's armor'' That is my understanding of the new and improved naming scheme. Am I right? Please correct or add rules above as neccessary. Thanks. (This is probably written or discussed somewhere but I'm a bit lost, sorry.) --''Glynnis'' 14:36, 18 January 2007 (CST) :Looks correct to me but I am sleepy. :P - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 14:38, 18 January 2007 (CST) ::Looks good to me too. The Warrior Ascalon Armor is a problem though, since there are two. Currently Ascalon Armor and Warrior Ascalon Armor (Plus the gallery article Ascalon Armor (art), not really related, but irritating) >< — Stylva (talk)( ) 16:40, 18 January 2007 (CST) :::Lol, some more late night editing BeXoR? Tell me if they still look correct by daylight. ;) :::I added s Armor'' to the rules and updated the examples for Ascalon Armor. --''Glynnis'' 13:39, 19 January 2007 (CST) ::::'s Armor is a function page not an art type. And yes, ascended should only be applied when there is a non-ascended type of the same name. - [[User:Bexor|'''BeXoR]] 14:28, 19 January 2007 (CST) :::::I was going to reply that you were wrong but then I checked Necromancer's Armor. Oops. /blush Do you want to keep A'rmor or change it to '''a'rmor? The overview page is Necromancer armor. --''Glynnis'' 14:57, 19 January 2007 (CST) ::::::Follow GW:ULC and make the function pages Profession's armor. Has to be so bloody complicated. :( - [[User:Bexor|'''BeXoR]] 15:13, 19 January 2007 (CST) :::::::Ok, updated. I also moved the example. Now go to sleep! --''Glynnis'' 15:19, 19 January 2007 (CST) ::::::::I only just finished the movie! D: - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 15:21, 19 January 2007 (CST) Headgear art What does a headgear art page look like? I think that is the next example we need. The headgear function page is (mostly) finished. I need to check everything on it a second time but the format should be finished... unless there are comments of course. :) --''Glynnis'' 15:52, 20 January 2007 (CST) :Pretty much the same as a normal art page. Art box, then crafting, then galleries. It might not be the best idea to link to that page though, I'm not sure. So much art is specific to an attribute. If you look at Mesmer Prophecies Headgear that might work. - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 02:06, 21 January 2007 (CST) ::Hmm... I understood we were going to make one headgear art page for each profession (with an overview) and one attribute function page for all professions. That makes a total of 11 headgear pages (10 art, one per prof, and 1 function). What else do we need? ::Note: Many other art pages will also include headgear that is part of that art (like factions armor). --''Glynnis'' 14:50, 22 January 2007 (CST) Cost Should cost be in crafting total? - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 09:30, 23 January 2007 (CST) :I don't think it should, but that's just my personal style opinion. I think it looks ugly with it there ;) Then again, I was against the whole total-column thing from the start. But since people seem to always add it in anyway I tried to like it.. — Stylva (talk)( ) 09:42, 23 January 2007 (CST) ::You are an good guildwiki citizen, Stylva. :) --''Glynnis'' 14:43, 23 January 2007 (CST) :::I don't think it should be there either, but I like the crafting total column because maths is definitely not my strong point. *blush* - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 23:37, 23 January 2007 (CST) ::::A calculator, and the material needed for hands/feet times 7. Or 8 if the headgear needs the same materials ;) That's how I did the total column in my crafting box template :P What I don't like is when the total column really stretches the rest, row-wise. ::::Btw, should I try to bring up the issue about the template again, or do you not feel like implementing it? There will still be occasions where it cannot be used, so we will have to have the table-formatting guidelines there anyway. (This is on topic in the way that the template always puts the table the way we want it to be, if you just tell me what's wrong ;) ) — Stylva (talk)( ) 05:38, 24 January 2007 (CST) :::::Even that is confusing lol. As for the template, continue with it if you wish, and when it is done just add it into the s&f as an option. - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 07:10, 24 January 2007 (CST) Armor function box The new armor function box is now being used for all function articles. I checked a few pages and the only error I found is in the name (example: "Aeromancer's Armor armor"). The name should no longer include "Armor" because the template adds it. I don't think we need to take time to fix these pages since all of the current function pages will (eventually) be replaced or become redirects. --''Glynnis'' 15:27, 25 January 2007 (CST) :Are we ready to start implementing the new s&f? The only things that aren't done now, is linking to the correct art pages for the headgear, correct? - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 22:39, 25 January 2007 (CST) ::Yes, I think so... /gulp. The only possible problems we might have is linking to headgear art (as you say), writing a (useful and understandable) basic armor page and deciding if we need "'s armor" function pages. I don't know much about writing style and formatting but if you have any questions about the template, just ask. --''Glynnis'' 18:02, 26 January 2007 (CST) Insignia question The left column ("Name") should link to the function pages. The right column ("Armor with this Bonus Inherently") should link to art pages. Correct? --''Glynnis'' 16:25, 1 February 2007 (CST) :On the Insignia page, yes, that's a good idea. - [[User:Bexor|'BeXoR']] 00:15, 2 February 2007 (CST)